ext Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]> writes:

> On a more serious note though, forbidding the user to do things he'd
> want to do is a bad design concept ;-=)

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly.  I have, unfortunately, mostly given up the
fight against the moronic requests for these anti-features, but maybe I
can find some motivation again.


There is a line between being helpful by reminding the user that
something unexpectedly bad might happen when he goes forward, and
outright preventing him or her from going forward.

There are a number of examples in the package manager:

 - If you don't have 50% of battery or are plugged in, we don't allow
   you to update the OS.

 - If you don't have 20% of battery or are plugged in, we don't allow
   you to install 3rd party applications.

 - If you are on a cellular connection, we don't allow you to download a
   OS update beyond a certain size.

 - If there is a newer version of the store client, you must install it
   before being able to use the store.  (You can't even use the store
   via its web site in this case since the browser redirects to the
   store client).

I see this anti-feature creep mostly as a disease that has befallen our
product managers.  They turn into control-freak zombies.  I hope I am
overreacting.
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to